First Amendment
Lawsuit Seeks to Bar South Carolina’s ‘I Believe’ License Plates
Posted Jun 20, 2008, 10:48 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
A legal group is seeking an injunction to bar production of license plates in South Carolina that feature a cross and the phrase “I believe.”
Americans United for Separation of Church and State contends the license plates are unconstitutional, the New York Times reports. The group’s executive director, Barry Lynn, told the Times that approval of the plate was “a clear signal that Christianity is the preferred religion of South Carolina.”
The group filed suit on behalf of several clergy members and a Hindu group.
South Carolina legislators passed a bill in May making the plates available to drivers who want them. No organization will benefit from the sales, unlike sponsors of other specialty plates such as the Boy Scouts and colleges.
Related Stories
- Kansas High Court Asked to Decide: Can Judges Fill Out Questionnaires?
Sep 5, 2008, 04:14 pm CDT - 8th Circuit: Bankruptcy Provision Violates Lawyer Free Speech Rights
Sep 5, 2008, 06:00 am CDT - Sunglasses Issue Obscures Case Outcome
Sep 4, 2008, 04:54 pm CDT - Police Beat Pakistan Lawyers in Clash Over Ousted Appellate Judges
Sep 4, 2008, 01:10 pm CDT
Related Topics
Commenting has expired on this post.
Comments
Posted by Gary - 2 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 5 hours, 58 minutes ago
"South Carolina legislators passed a bill in May making the plates available to drivers who want them.” i.e. no one is forced to get the plates and therefore there is no church and state issue.
Posted by Butch - 2 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 5 hours, 6 minutes ago
Actually the Constitutional provision in play here isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything, it’s about the government giving preferential treatment to one faith over another, which is obviously what this plate does. It’s unlawful and arrogant.
Posted by Reinero - 2 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 3 hours, 20 minutes ago
It is unbelievable what energy some people waste on non-issues. I can only quote Jay Leno:
“With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?”
Posted by df - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 16 hours, 19 minutes ago
I am Christian, but I wouldn’t want one of those plates (there’s actually in part a religious objection I have...[grin]) and I can certainly see the problem with only allowing one form of “religious” license plate. I’d say stick with secular license plates (with themes of fishing or hunting or sports teams or whatever the state has) and if someone feels the need to publicly express his or her faith in this manner, use a bumper sticker.
Posted by Abbey =) - 2 months, 2 weeks, 7 hours, 24 minutes ago
You must be kidding!?! This is clearly not oppressive. Why not just let other groups propose their own design and move on to more productive matters.
Posted by Paul - 2 months, 2 weeks, 1 hour, 36 minutes ago
This is just the kind of argument we love in SC—essentially pointless symbolism. Our state government will put almost anything on a license plate as long as there are enough people willing to pay a premium and the premium covers the tooling and production costs (with a little extra for the state, perhaps). This means that Anabaptists and Zoroastrians (and everything in-between) can have a license plate. We already have plates for fraternities, sororities, colleges, social organizations, endangered animals, historical submarines—so why not religions? It makes paying vehicle license fees a bit more palatable for the believers in our midst. Like the lottery, it is essentially a voluntary tax on those who wish to pay it.
Personally, I am waiting for the day that I can get a brand name on my tag along with a check from the brand name for my trouble, instead of having to pay for my vehicle license tag. Now that is good government!